GUEST COLUMN: Working poor can't afford $64 per week

Unfortunately we are stepping back to the talk about fees that the city is considering to charge residents/non-residents for our community's park program. I do understand how hard it is to provide any costly service at a free or limited cost. We all as not only organizations but also as individuals must adhere to budgets and the limits they impose. However, by imposing this proposed fee, we are putting an undue hardship on residents that are already dealing with stagnant or reduced wages and other cuts that will impact their quality of living. The concerns regarding the children in our community have not changed in the past years. I want to address comments made by proponents of a fee charge in the past (that parents have enough notice, they just need to give up a few things and put their children first, there is subsidized day care provided by Social Services).

Let us look at a monthly budget of a working single mother with 2 children.

40 hours weekly at $7.25hr = $1,256.67

(gross income for the household per month)

Advertisement

Average monthly rent for 2 bedroom apt. = $650

Average monthly National Grid = $150

Average monthly Car Payment/Ins = $200

Gas @ 4.03 a gal/12 tank (monthly) = $209.56

These expenses total $1,209.56

$1256.67- $1209.56 leaves a balance for this mother of $47.11 a month to use for incidentals (e.g. toilet paper, soap, toothpaste). Before taxes.

Where in this budget is Mom able to provide the proposed $64 per week per child? What would you ask this mother to give up to put her children first?

Subsidized childcare through Social Services is not an option as according to Social Services; the park program does not qualify for subsidizing since it is not day care, not to mention that subsidized childcare has at this moment a seven month waiting list. This means Mom would have to request Subsidized Childcare this month (October).

Another concern is closing the park. Vets Field is central to low-income housing and would be closed to those not registered. In the past for the program, if a child were interested he or she was given a registration form for to fill out and could return the next day. Imposing a fee means that child may never be able to return. Higinbotham does not have a playground. Harmon is very secluded and a danger to an unattended child. Vets, whether the child was unattended or not is easily seen from the road and more protected from dangers that could occur.

As in the past, the public will not come forward with their concerns. Unfortunately, people in this community are struggling to get by and survive in these poor economic times. They have their pride and will not discuss their financial matters as this is a very private and confidential matter. They also do not want to deal with possible repercussions or attitudes towards their children.

I understand that this program does cost money to run. But this proposed cost should be researched further into the impact this fee will have on our community as well as pursuing grants that the Recreation Department would be eligible for due to our low income families of our community. I still believe that there are grants out there that should be researched and applied for to enrich our community. One does not always have to be 501.3C to apply. And if that seems to be the case, then perhaps we should look at partnering with such an organization.

I am asking that the Recreation Department goes back to the drawing board pursuing every possible avenue including grants to underwrite the program for the 2013 year.

The fact of the matter is it will be the children who will suffer. They are helpless victims in this situation and need a voice. Let us ensure equal and safe access to ALL residents of Oneida.